I have a couple of questions that pertain to the Obstacles and Relief rules.

If while looking for a disc in the woods a player unintentionally broke a branch between the lie and the basket, without yet knowing were the disc was, does the player get penalized 1 stroke?

Secondly, in very long grass, on the sides of a very generous and mowed fairway, is a player allowed to flatten the grass behind the lie (in the run up area) to ease the run up? Does the long grass become an Obstacle.

Thanks for you time.

---------------------------------------------------

The reply from Conrad Damon:

In response to your first question, I wouldn't assess a penalty stroke for two reasons: the lie had not been determined at the time the branch was broken, and it was unintentional. I know that intent can be difficult to determine, but there is always some subjectivity in the application of rules.

As to your second question, grass is not on the list of casual obstacles which can be moved. I would consider flattening the grass to be moving it, though its location doesn't change. The situation is the same as if there were tall weeds, or bushes, or any other plant life that makes a runup difficult. That's what makes it the rough.

To test this theory: next time someone loses a disc, ask them to determine/establish the lie before its found._________________Cell phones make it easy to communicate with everybody except the people you're currently with.

the lie should be determined when the disc hits the ground, not when they find it, IMO

Agreed. Whether the location of the disc is known or not, it marks the place of the next shot. If it can't be found, you get a penality and have to throw from where you last established a lie. You do this because you're a chump for not having enough control to know where your disc went.

However, as a rules official, I support this interpretation of the rule because it is official.

The whiteball analogy:
even if you don't know where your ball is, it marks the lie of the next shot. If you step on it while looking for it, you get a stroke for disturbing the lie. You are responsible for knowing where your ball is at all times in white ball.

The ball exists, even though you can't see it. In whiteball, if a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is around to hear it, it still makes a sound.

The PDGA feels that disc golf is different. The disc doesn't exist until someone sees it. In disc golf, if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, it does not make a sound.

To test this theory: next time someone loses a disc, ask them to determine/establish the lie before its found.

I would sooner ask them to make sure they establish the lie while avoiding any contact, intentional or not, with obstacles between where they can reasonably be expected to find their disc, and the target.

Again, they are not obliged to by this ruling.

You are free to unintentionally disturb things until you establish your lie.

To test this theory: next time someone loses a disc, ask them to determine/establish the lie before its found.

I would sooner ask them to make sure they establish the lie while avoiding any contact, intentional or not, with obstacles between where they can reasonably be expected to find their disc, and the target.

Again, they are not obliged to by this ruling.

You are free to unintentionally disturb things until you establish your lie.

Meaning you could where some really dark shades and look for everything using a pin side approach and actually be legal, although not very sportsman like.

... in very long grass, on the sides of a very generous and mowed fairway, is a player allowed to flatten the grass behind the lie (in the run up area) to ease the run up? Does the long grass become an Obstacle.

Conrad Damon wrote:

... grass is not on the list of casual obstacles which can be moved. I would consider flattening the grass to be moving it, though its location doesn't change. The situation is the same as if there were tall weeds, or bushes, or any other plant life that makes a runup difficult. That's what makes it the rough.

This is an answer that lack clarity, but I think it sets the proper precedent:

Grass is not a casual obstacle. It can not be moved under the rule.

Flattening grass is moving it. (Hooray!)

Grass is like tall weeds, bushes, or any other plant life.

You can't tamp it down to improve a run-up. You get a stroke for doing so.

You must assume a stance that minimizes your disturbance of the grass and throw without preparing the space.

I would sooner ask them to make sure they establish the lie while avoiding any contact, intentional or not, with obstacles between where they can reasonably be expected to find their disc, and the target.

Again, they are not obliged to by this ruling.

You are free to unintentionally disturb things until you establish your lie.

Meaning you could where some really dark shades and look for everything using a pin side approach and actually be legal, although not very sportsman like.

According to the ruling, this would appear to be the case.

A player is under no obligation to attempt to minimize ANY contact with obstacles between where they expect their disc to be and the target, that is until they establish their lie. They are obliged not to INTENTIONALLY break any vegetation, but that's under another rule, and it costs you two strokes, not one. More on that another week.

Here's the grey area:
Consider the following case:
A player throws a shot into a dense bush, 12' high and long as the fairway. They know they didn't make it out of the bush. The bush is about 40' from the target (you see this situation all the time at flat mountain).

The player knows they will throw their putter, so, the player walks along the "fairway" past the target, drops their bag in line with the path to the next pad, and walks back toward the bush where they reasonably believe their disc is. They walk on a direct line between the target, and where they believe their disc might be.

There is no path that can lead them into the bush. The player is going to have to go bushwhacking. The player then plunges into the bush looking for their disc. They raise their hands to protect their eyes as they body check the bush. Branches can be heard to break. The player doesn't thrash around and appear to INTENTIONALLY make an alley through the bush, but the act of approaching their expected lie from the basket does leave a noticable void in what once would have been an impenetrable thicket.

The player wrestles his way into the bush, stepping on the lower branches, and the group can hear more snapping twigs and branches. The player then announces, "oh, it's right here in front of me. How lucky I didn't have to march around much more in here! This bush is really dense."

They turn around, drop their marker disc, and prepare to make their 40' putt, back through the void in the thicket they just made.

The player makes the shot, and it flies uninhibbitted through the void and hits the target.

What is the ruling?

BigBrotherPenton wrote:

If while looking for a disc in the woods a player unintentionally broke a branch between the lie and the basket, without yet knowing were the disc was, does the player get penalized 1 stroke?

Conrad Damon wrote:

I wouldn't assess a penalty stroke for two reasons: the lie had not been determined at the time the branch was broken, and it was unintentional. I know that intent can be difficult to determine, but there is always some subjectivity in the application of rules.

By this, it would appear that the player makes the shot, and isn't penalized, as long as he didn't intend to break anything on the way into the bush.

The thing is, if the brush is impenetrable, you have to known that you were going to break something on the way into the bush. If you plunge into the bush where you think your disc lies, you are now intentionally breaking branches between the lie and the target. Is this supposed to be legal? Is it legal? Is "not seeing your disc" an excuse for such destruction? How do you ascert that the player INTENDED to break the branch? Based on the outcome, you can bet that they knew they were going to improve their lie, but how can it be proven?

How would you feel if you were playing a match play round, you threw the perfect drive and parked it, and the guy you were playing against did this for a birdie, splitting the hole despite his bad drive?

Would you feel cheated?

Last edited by burjwahzeh on Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:55 am; edited 3 times in total

... in very long grass, on the sides of a very generous and mowed fairway, is a player allowed to flatten the grass behind the lie (in the run up area) to ease the run up? Does the long grass become an Obstacle.

Conrad Damon wrote:

... grass is not on the list of casual obstacles which can be moved. I would consider flattening the grass to be moving it, though its location doesn't change. The situation is the same as if there were tall weeds, or bushes, or any other plant life that makes a runup difficult. That's what makes it the rough.

This is an answer that lack clarity, but I think it sets the proper precedent:

Grass is not a casual obstacle. It can not be moved under the rule.

Flattening grass is moving it. (Hooray!)

Grass is like tall weeds, bushes, or any other plant life.

You can't tamp it down to improve a run-up. You get a stroke for doing so.

You must assume a stance that minimizes your disturbance of the grass and throw without preparing the space.

Excellent.

But, would the following be legal? No tamping, but you still take a run up and trample it in the process of throwing. Should be legal in my eyes, as you are dealing with the rough as you throw not prior. Or is this viewed the same as moving something in your forward line as you shoot?_________________If you can't win the event in regulation, try, try, try again.

the lie should be determined when the disc hits the ground, not when they find it, IMO

Agreed. Whether the location of the disc is known or not, it marks the place of the next shot. If it can't be found, you get a penality and have to throw from where you last established a lie. You do this because you're a chump for not having enough control to know where your disc went.

However, as a rules official, I support this interpretation of the rule because it is official.

Really, you agree? So the lie is where the disc hits the ground? What about rolls, or skips?